Marks O’Neill’s Philadelphia office participated in a holiday charity drive collecting items for the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), to benefit children through CHOP’s Child Life, Education and Creative Arts Therapy program.

Sean Kelly of Marks O’Neill’s New Jersey office represented a pharmacy in a wrongful death claim action filed against the manufacturers and prescribers of various opioids. We filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that there was no plausible cause of action pled under New Jersey Law against our pharmacy client.  After a persuasive oral argument, the court agreed, granted our motion and dismissed all claims against our client.

Sean Kelly of Marks O’Neill’s New Jersey office scored a victory in obtaining summary judgment on behalf of a medical billing company in a putative class action.  On behalf of the Class, Plaintiff claimed that our client’s written communications violated the FDCPA by inclusion of a code that was visible on the outside of its envelope.  We argued that discovery demonstrated that the Plaintiff lacked standing, having suffered no concrete or actionable harm under the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo.  We were also able to distinguish our client’s code from other markings that the Third Circuit found to violate the FDCPA.  The District Court granted summary judgment, dismissing all claims. 

Sean Kelly of Marks O’Neill’s New Jersey office obtained a dismissal of all claims of legal malpractice against our clients arising from underlying complex commercial litigation. Our clients represented a corporation in various pieces of litigation stemming from a failed commercial property development. Plaintiffs alleged damages in excess of $50 million dollars. We successfully argued that Plaintiff was not able to allege the necessary causal relationship between our client’s representation and its alleged damages. The District Court agreed and dismissed the Complaint.

Marks O’Neill’s New Jersey office was also successful in obtaining dismissal of legal malpractice claims arising from the handling of Plaintiff’s dental malpractice claims. We filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that Plaintiff failed to set forth sufficient facts to establish that our client formally undertook the representation, but instead merely consulted with the  Plaintiff. The trial court agreed that there existed no viable claim of legal malpractice and dismissed the claims.